Can we please stop asking questions on other forums about questions we are discussing here, WE don't need others opinions especially when everyone else seems to have different opinions about this.

Soz Guys ... As usual, it's me! If this problems been floating about forever, then the players at the other forums don't know about it and I just wanted to bring it too their attention that the Open R-Tool is wrong. Shouldn't we share rule problems/solutions with other club/forums? No one club/person knows the rules 100% and they've obviously not noticed it, so I just wanted to bring it up for them to look into.

We all want the AT-43 rules to be right, so now they'll see something that's passed them by ... Walts

I like to think of the rules as being "simplistic", "fantastical", "unique", "challenging", "as hole ridden as ... ", "extremely vague" ... and a few other words, which mixed together does equate to "Stupid!" But, let's be honest, what's more stupid than chess if we where to get all analytic about everything?! What's that game all about!!! How can castles move? Why does the bishop only go diagonally, is he drunk!!!

I think Rackham must have played a lot of chess and wanted to mess with everyone. AT-43 = French "va-va-vooom" at it's best!!! ... Walts

Chess is a wonderful game. A whole different level of war gaming. Don't knock it thanks very much!!!!

Cheers ... Gerry

Soz Gerry, I luv chess!

I didn't mean to knock the first every "wargame" I played as a kid, but boy, did it every confuse me when the master keep going on about castles moving and knights riding wonky!

My point is that too much "analysing" is going on with the armybooks & core rules which can't be justified, as AT-43 is a fantasy game. Obviously, clarity is needed, but not at the expense of giving an army an advantage where there never was one or even taking away a disadvantage. Players have to be unbiased when making decisions on everything, and I just haven't seen that no matter how many times I keep saying it. I'd been biased towards the UNA when I played them, but I've moved on from that knowling the problems it would have caused if I got my way with the "BattleAxe" artillery! No-one else has.

I also don't believe we should be adding in rules as well, like the "Jump System" ruling of old that only INF can use it. Keep things simple and play the rules as their written. Adding in these rules doesn't bring anything to the game ... imho of course ... Walts

No big deal, as everyone playing at that time was happy with the interpretation as it made sense to us.

But we now know that our interpretation was wrong, and that all "fighters" (ie Striders, AFV & Inf) can have the ability as a company. Core to all the rules is that it's a game of fantasy! Because this ability was tweaked, Therians have no way of "flying" their troop carrier around the battlefield, so it's a major disadvantage to them. This is my problem with all the tweaks floating about ... they all have unwanted effects on specific armies, factions or units in some way.

I say bin them all, except the one's needed for clarity. Keep things simple as Rackham intented. Why make a specific rule for one unit or hero, that restricts gameplay and unit movement or gives odd armies advantages, regardless of how small that tweak might seem. Sods law, a tweak will win a battle and cause heartache for someone! ... Walts

Hey Guys ... I've just noticed something rather interestinggggggg regarding the Karman (vanilla) main army composition, from a French point of view!

It was Gerry that put me onto the idea when he said he'd downloaded the French book, so I just thought about all the previous ref's in forums to wonky translations and downloaded the French Karman Armybook, copied the unit composition and look what cropped up in the Google translation app ...

Unité de fantassins <=> "Infantry Unit"

I kid myself on that the French books are the original rules as written, and our English books to be wonky! The French word ... Soldat <=> "Soldier" ... is mentioned throughout the book, which is used to reference soldiers, so Nazgul is right, based on the French books!

So, I'll happily eat some humble pie and say Banksi should get the INF classification in his (vanilla) army as Nazgul has written in the Open R-Tool and apologize for doubting the guys tool, ohh-errr misses! He's obviously French (is he???) or speaks the lingo and uses the French books for everything, ergo he's right.

Of course, having checked other inHouse Rules we've made in the past against the French rules, we've made a few other "bo-bo's" like the one above! See if u can spot the bad interpretations!!! ... Walts

I think we need to be careful about using the translations of individual words or small phrases as, when translated literally, they can mean something slightly different to what they mean when in a full sentence or paragraph.

As an example Fantassin is translated as infantryman, foot soldier, or grunt